2019-2020 US Election Megathread II: Tim Ryan's Empire

[Tarsonis]

Blah blah blah what's a bird or a fish. If my kid lives in a society free from people like you it'll be more than worth it.

a world like that would be worth it to you if it means access to any and all guns? Free from people like me? What is that supposed to mean?

It means a world where our rights are stripped from us is not worth saving, so he'll happily cling to his rights as everybody dies. That's a better outcome to him.

[Telconi]

Elsewhere:

Child: "Grandpa how do we have all this stuff saved."

Grandpa" Well we had guns, thus when the raids started we were able to fend off all the raiders, and take their stash as well. We're pretty much set."

Child: couldn't we have avoided this? I read in a book this all could have been prevented but you did nothing. Why didnt you do something? Why where you so selfish then

Oh I'm sorry for selfishly creating a better future for my descendants. My bad.

[San Lumen]

Child: couldn't we have avoided this? I read in a book this all could have been prevented but you did nothing. Why didnt you do something? Why where you so selfish then

"The people who wanted to help the environment also wanted to rob us of our human rights, and we said no. If they had just stopped their crusade on human rights, everything would have been fine, but we survived, they didn't.

Child: and you ruined the world as a result. I hope your happy Grandpa. I hate this and wish I could change it all with a time machine but sadly that has no hope of ever being invented now.

[San Lumen]

Child: couldn't we have avoided this? I read in a book this all could have been prevented but you did nothing. Why didnt you do something? Why where you so selfish then

Oh I'm sorry for selfishly creating a better future for my descendants. My bad.

How is the future i laid out better?

[Telconi]

Blah blah blah what's a bird or a fish. If my kid lives in a society free from people like you it'll be more than worth it.

a world like that would be worth it to you if it means access to any and all guns? Free from people like me? What is that supposed to mean?

Yes. People who agree with you are gone. People who desire to oppress others stop having the capacity to do so. A world free from evil people.

[Tarsonis]

"The people who wanted to help the environment also wanted to rob us of our human rights, and we said no. If they had just stopped their crusade on human rights, everything would have been fine, but we survived, they didn't.

Child: and you ruined the world as a result. I hope your happy Grandpa. I hate this and wish I could change it all with a time machine but sadly that has no hope of ever being invented now.

Nope you ruined the world. You made taking gun rights paramount, and refused to abandon your crusade against gunrights to the detriment of environmental policy.

[Tarsonis]

Oh I'm sorry for selfishly creating a better future for my descendants. My bad.

How is the future i laid out better?

Ours is real, yours is fake.

[Telconi]

Oh I'm sorry for selfishly creating a better future for my descendants. My bad.

How is the future i laid out better?

Well presumably the gun grabbers lost.

[San Lumen]

Child: and you ruined the world as a result. I hope your happy Grandpa. I hate this and wish I could change it all with a time machine but sadly that has no hope of ever being invented now.

Nope you ruined the world. You made taking gun rights paramount, and refused to abandon your crusade against gunrights to the detriment of environmental policy.

We were doing a hypothetical future conversation. This is not about me.

[Shrillland]

Will you all knock it off? Leave reruns where they belong, on Basic Cable.

[Telconi]

Will you all knock it off? Leave reruns where they belong, on Basic Cable.

It's the election thread. It is literally the basic cable of our society.

Every four years we go over the same old bullshit and the same old bullshit keeps being bullshit.

[Tarsonis]

Nope you ruined the world. You made taking gun rights paramount, and refused to abandon your crusade against gunrights to the detriment of environmental policy.

We were doing a hypothetical future conversation. This is not about me.

Fine, supplement you for they. Irrelevant. The point still remains. You've been given your answer: You want us to vote for democrats and save the earth, the democrats need to give up their crusade on gunrights. But apparently stripping people of gun rights matters more to you than the environment. Compromise requires sacrifice. If you're unwilling to sacrifice, then you don't really care about it.

[Farnhamia]

Will you all knock it off? Leave reruns where they belong, on Basic Cable.

It's the election thread. It is literally the basic cable of our society.

Every four years we go over the same old bullshit and the same old bullshit keeps being bullshit.

Yeah, but you're not even talking about the election anymore, just arguing about whose philosophy or take on life on earth or whatever is better or worse. Take it to one of the threads we have for that or find a playground somewhere.

[Telconi]

It's the election thread. It is literally the basic cable of our society.

Every four years we go over the same old bullshit and the same old bullshit keeps being bullshit.

Yeah, but you're not even talking about the election anymore, just arguing about whose philosophy or take on life on earth or whatever is better or worse. Take it to one of the threads we have for that or find a playground somewhere.

Isn't that sort of the core principle of an election?

[Farnhamia]

Yeah, but you're not even talking about the election anymore, just arguing about whose philosophy or take on life on earth or whatever is better or worse. Take it to one of the threads we have for that or find a playground somewhere.

Isn't that sort of the core principle of an election?

If you were talking about the candidates' philosophy or take on life on earth or whatever, sure, but you're not. You're needling San Lumen, who's needling you back, with other people kibitzing.

[Telconi]

Isn't that sort of the core principle of an election?

If you were talking about the candidates' philosophy or take on life on earth or whatever, sure, but you're not. You're needling San Lumen, who's needling you back, with other people kibitzing.

We were talking about the philosophy of a primary party, Lumen's specific agreement with that is incidental.

[Napkizemlja]

Isn't that sort of the core principle of an election?

If you were talking about the candidates' philosophy or take on life on earth or whatever, sure, but you're not. You're needling San Lumen, who's needling you back, with other people kibitzing.

I mean that sounds awfully like an election ngl. Sanders needles Warren who needles Buttgreg or whatever his name is who needles de Blasio who needles Kamala who then cries out that she'll toss him in prison if his kids miss fourth period geography.

[San Lumen]

If you were talking about the candidates' philosophy or take on life on earth or whatever, sure, but you're not. You're needling San Lumen, who's needling you back, with other people kibitzing.

I mean that sounds awfully like an election ngl. Sanders needles Warren who needles Buttgreg or whatever his name is who needles de Blasio who needles Kamala who then cries out that she'll toss him in prison if his kids miss fourth period geography.

An election campaign is about discussing issues is it not and then on election day the people decide via secret ballot who they want to hold that position.

[Napkizemlja]

We didn’t create the dichotomy the politicians did. The democrats are the party of sweeping gun control and environmentalism, while the republicans are the party of gun rights and not giving a shit about the environment. As it’s been said, if the Democrats stop their anti gun crusade it creates room for lateral movement and we aren’t forced to pick between our rights and the environment. It’s a shame you’re so selfish you’re unwilling negotiate at all. You clearly care more about restricting gun rights than you do about the environment.

Hey hey hey I'm for not banning guns. The Dems haven't lost all hope.

Are you pro banning ownership of JDAM's though?

[Telconi]

We didn’t create the dichotomy the politicians did. The democrats are the party of sweeping gun control and environmentalism, while the republicans are the party of gun rights and not giving a shit about the environment. As it’s been said, if the Democrats stop their anti gun crusade it creates room for lateral movement and we aren’t forced to pick between our rights and the environment. It’s a shame you’re so selfish you’re unwilling negotiate at all. You clearly care more about restricting gun rights than you do about the environment.

Hey hey hey I'm for not banning guns. The Dems haven't lost all hope.

They have you're just idealistic.

[Northern Davincia]

God I hate NSG and this thread is why. How many times am I going to read about the same argument over and over by people who dont listen to each other, post in bad faith, and sound like a broken record. Its dumb.

But oh well. I was looking over the candidates again and the leaders arent left enough for me. I want a libertarian social Democrat. Give me my guns, freedom, and take care of the poor!

*COUGHS*

I'M RIGHT HERE!

Help us Lotharia, you're our only hope.

[Telconi]

Are you pro banning ownership of JDAM's though?

I'll be honest I don't even know what those are.

It's the election thread. It is literally the basic cable of our society.

Every four years we go over the same old bullshit and the same old bullshit keeps being bullshit.

Sigged.

It means a world where our rights are stripped from us is not worth saving, so he'll happily cling to his rights as everybody dies. That's a better outcome to him.

As much as I disagree that makes sense, moral implications aside.

Who is morally inferior he who let's the surface of the world become a barren wasteland, but keeps the soul alive. Or the one who sells the soul for beauty and life?

[Cannot think of a name]

Ah fuck me, you guys went right back into it. Jesus christ...

In actual election news, those not clearing the bar for the debates think the bar is too high shocker:

The three candidates at risk of missing the debates are Miramar, Florida, Mayor Wayne Messam, whose campaign has struggled to get any traction; Rep. Seth Moulton, who announced his campaign in late April and has yet to qualify on either threshold, and Montana Gov. Steve Bullock, who has currently not qualified for the debates by either committee standard and whose team is the angriest about the possible snub.
Bullock got into the race in mid-May, relatively late compared to other 2020 contenders. The governor has told CNN that he launched late because, as the governor of Montana, he had to oversee his state's legislative session, which happens every two years. Bullock did that and the body passed Medicaid expansion. His advisers now believe that the DNC rules are punishing a candidate who stayed at work instead of running for President.
"The DNC seems, on paper, interested in a 50-state strategy, but they're punishing the only candidate in the field to win a Trump state for doing his job," said Matt McKenna, a longtime Democratic operative who is advising the Bullock campaign. "I can say with 100% certainty that if Gov. Bullock announces in January, to chase after the DNC's arbitrary and secret rules, there's no way he gets Medicaid expansion though a 60% Republican legislature."
Asked about the grassroots fundraising threshold, McKenna added: "I'd say that punishes candidates from the parts of the country you fly over to get from the DNC HQ to Los Angeles."
One of Bullock's primary complaints is that a February poll from The Washington Post/ABC News is now being counted under DNC rules because it asked an open-ended question that included a host of names like Oprah Winfrey and Michelle Obama.
Bullock's campaign emailed reporters on Thursday about the poll not being allowed, calling it a "secret rule change for debate qualification."
"While Governor Bullock was expanding Medicaid to one in ten Montanans despite a nearly 60% Republican legislature, the DNC was making arbitrary rules behind closed doors," said Jenn Ridder, Bullock's campaign manager. "The DNC's unmasking of this rule unfairly singles out the only Democratic candidate who won a Trump state — and penalizes him for doing his job."
But Xochitl Hinojosa, a spokeswoman for the DNC, said Thursday that the committee "notified the Bullock campaign several times beginning in March that this poll would not count because it was open-ended and not a traditional horse race question."

Did he mention the medicaid expansion?

Gillibrand is less angry, still upset:

Gillibrand called the 65,000-donor threshold an "odd measurable" that is "random and inaccurate." Although she added, "They're the DNC, so I'll follow the rules that are given and I'll have to play by the rules," the senator said the measure "is not determinative of any of the things that matter about whether I'd beat Trump."
"Because if Madonna was running, she'd have a million supporters. She'd have more than anybody," Gillibrand concluded. "What having followers is a measurable of is whether you're famous, it's a measure of whether people know enough about you to send you a dollar."
Almost a month later, Gillibrand still remains short of the 65,000-donor threshold (she qualified based on polls months ago). She announced on Thursday that she was within 5,000 donors and her campaign spokeswoman said they had seen a recent uptick in support, days before the DNC determines who makes the first debate stage.

For Moulton, he seems to know what cards he's playing with:

"No, I'm not going to make the first debate, but I knew that getting in so late," the congressman told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt in an interview this week. "But I think that's OK, that there's, this first debate's going to have 20 people. Folks are barely going to get a chance to speak. This is a long campaign. And it's not going to be decided by the Democratic National Committee in their debates. It's going to get decided by the American people. And that's where the response to my campaign has been so positive so far."

Also, apparently, one of them is upset that they can't get a theme night on the subject that they want the mostest:

The other area of complaints stems from the fact that the DNC has declined to focus an entire debate on climate change, something that Washington Gov. Jay Inslee has asked from the committee.
Inslee sent a letter to Perez on Tuesday asking for a debate focused solely on climate change, the issue the 2020 candidate is staking his entire campaign on. By Wednesday, the DNC had already told Inslee no and warned him about attending debates outside the DNC structure that may be focused solely on climate.
Inslee seized on the moment -- and has been fundraising on it ever since.
"This is deeply disappointing," Inslee said Thursday. "The DNC is silencing the voices of Democratic activists, many of our progressive partner organizations, and nearly half of the Democratic presidential field, who want to debate the existential crisis of our time. Democratic voters say that climate change is their top issue; the Democratic National Committee must listen to the grassroots of the party."
A recent CNN poll found that 82% of Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents find climate change to be a "very important" issue, ranking it at the top of the list ahead of universal health care, tighter gun laws and impeaching Trump.

Inslee has looked to garner more support for a climate debate by calling on his competitors to support his cause. The likelihood that happens, however, is slim.

[Shrillland]

Are you pro banning ownership of JDAM's though?

I'll be honest I don't even know what those are.

It's the election thread. It is literally the basic cable of our society.

Every four years we go over the same old bullshit and the same old bullshit keeps being bullshit.

Sigged.

It means a world where our rights are stripped from us is not worth saving, so he'll happily cling to his rights as everybody dies. That's a better outcome to him.

As much as I disagree that makes sense, moral implications aside.

Joint Direct Attack Munitions, little computers stuck on old-fashioned bombs that can turn them into smart bombs. We developed them in the 90s since it turned out to be cheaper to convert old bombs($20,000 a pop) rather than build new ones($700,000 apiece).

[Napkizemlja]

Joint Direct Attack Munitions, little computers stuck on old-fashioned bombs that can turn them into smart bombs. We developed them in the 90s since it turned out to be cheaper to convert old bombs($20,000 a pop) rather than build new ones($700,000 apiece).

SocDem Revolution would require military grade technology so sure.

I'm unlike any other candidate in America. I'm not Left, Right, or Center, I'm Forward.

GOING 3D BITCHES!

I'm thinking more for home defense myself.